A Bayesian re-assessment of two Phase II trials of gemcitabine in metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer

The Simon two-stage minimax design is a popular statistical design used in Phase II clinical trials. The analysis of the data arising from the design typically involves the use of frequentist statistics. This paper presents an alternative, Bayesian, approach to the design and analysis of Phase II clinical trials. In particular, we consider how a Bayesian approach could have affected the design, analysis and interpretation of two parallel Phase II trials of the National Cancer Centre Singapore, on the activity of gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naïve and in previously treated patients with metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. We begin by explaining the Bayesian methodology and contrasting it with the frequentist approach. We then carry out a Bayesian analysis of the trial results. The conclusions drawn using the Bayesian approach were in general agreement with those obtained from the frequentist analysis. However they had the advantage of allowing for different and potentially more useful interpretations to be made regarding the trial results, as well as for the incorporation of external sources of information. In particular, using a Bayesian trial design, we were able to take into account the results of the parallel trial results when deciding whether to continue each trial beyond the interim stage

Infusion of Alloanergized Donor Lymphocytes after CD34-selected Haploidentical Myeloablative Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

NIH R21CA137645 and U19CA100265. JKD was funded by Leukemia and Lymphoma Society (Special fellow in Clinical Research), MRC (Clinician Scientist Fellowship G0902269) and CRUK centre grant (C16420/A18066). CRC was awarded Scholar in Clinical Research by the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (2400-13)

Clinical development of new drug-radiotherapy combinations.

In countries with the best cancer outcomes, approximately 60% of patients receive radiotherapy as part of their treatment, which is one of the most cost-effective cancer treatments. Notably, around 40% of cancer cures include the use of radiotherapy, either as a single modality or combined with other treatments. Radiotherapy can provide enormous benefit to patients with cancer. In the past decade, significant technical advances, such as image-guided radiotherapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy, and proton therapy enable higher doses of radiotherapy to be delivered to the tumour with significantly lower doses to normal surrounding tissues. However, apart from the combination of traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy with radiotherapy, little progress has been made in identifying and defining optimal targeted therapy and radiotherapy combinations to improve the efficacy of cancer treatment. The National Cancer Research Institute Clinical and Translational Radiotherapy Research Working Group (CTRad) formed a Joint Working Group with representatives from academia, industry, patient groups and regulatory bodies to address this lack of progress and to publish recommendations for future clinical research. Herein, we highlight the Working Group's consensus recommendations to increase the number of novel drugs being successfully registered in combination with radiotherapy to improve clinical outcomes for patients with cancer.National Institute for Health ResearchThis is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.7